Should researchers be allowed to use animals in testing the safety of drugs, vaccines, medical devices, and cosmetics?

They should be tested on criminals who were going to be sentenced to death

No, only humans that have consented to being tested on and who are rewarded.

No, test on criminals instead

No, use lab grown cells instead

only when necessary

no its wrong

It should be avoided at all possible intervals and care should be taken to ensure the animals are not in pain (pain killers etc). Never for cosmetics.

yes but not on endangered animals or animals that are vital in the food chain

for medical purposes

Drugs yes cosmetics no

Drugs not cosmetics

Depends which animals

Small rodents only

Test it on criminals

no. animals should NOT be used at all in any testing. instead testing should be conducted on convicted criminals such as rapists, child predators, sex traffickers, terrorists.

No, they should use violent criminals instead

Use sex offenders

Yes, but researchers should be ethical and ensure that they minimize risks to the testing population

No. They should be tested on paedophiles, killers, rapists and anyone who is doing a prison sentence for beating children, elderly and disabled people.

Only in situations were there is no other way of testing it, only if it comes down to a life or death situation.

Only in the testing for the safety of life saving drugs, vaccines and medical devices where it would be inhumane to test on a human subject and where the ends justify the means. For example, testing for potential drugs that can cure diseases or end pandemics. Never for cosmetics.

Yes, however the animal should never experience abnormal stress levels, they should never encounter more pain or stress than would be expected in their natural lives. The physical and mental wellbeing of the animal is priority, it must always take precedent over the potentiality of scientific discovery. Any side effects, no matter how severe and long lasting, must be attended to with full dedication to counter the effects and return the animal to a healthy state.

Only in very important drugs and treatments that have shown a lot of promise in prior testing, and when testing does not enflict substantial and irreversible damage to the animal. All other forms of testing must be done before.

If it’s for something life saving like a new medicine, then yes. For entertainment and cosmetics, no.

Yes as long as it it only for life changing things such as a cure for cancer etc and never for cosmetics.

So, there are different ways and methods that allow certain products to be tested without endangering living organisms.

criminals loose their legal rights for a reason. Of course this option should only be available for serious offenders. With ample evidence against them.

absolutely not, animals should be used to test out potentially dangerous substances. they do not deserve that abuse

We should use people who volunteerly accept to it and use animals, but focus on people testing more.

Test on prisoners that have committed the worse kind of acts. Animals should not suffer but these people should

Yes, unfortunately testing is needed on some products, so only when it can be demonstrated that it needed and only after they have passed prior testing so as to not be dangerous to the animals

Yes, but not for cosmetics and there must be strict laws as to how the animals are treated and it must be more beneficial than the cost

Their are other tests available. Animal testing should ONLY be used is it's absolutely nesasery, not because it's "easier and cheeper" and NOT for cosmetics.

Shouldn't humans be testing other humans instead of non-human animals? After all, most of these products are intended strictly for human consumption.

No but only if their is a decent alternative. I hate animal cruelty, but so we know of any other ways to test stuff?

It depends on what the drug is. If it’s desperate then yes but if it’s something that doesn’t half to be rushed then no.

Yes, but for limited time and as long as they are treated well and testing is stopped in the event of harm

Only where it is very, very necessary, never for cosmetics and there must be strict limitations on Primates and the conditions in which all animals can be housed.

(a perspective I like) No, only humans that have consented to being tested on and who are rewarded. Potentially death row inmate's too. However, they should still be given the choice, which will only add a year onto their death row wait.

if there is another way then this should always be used, the animals should have some quality of life and not in torture or pain mentally or pysically

In vitro testing of animal or human cells should be used instead. No animals should be used in cosmetics research.

Human safety should be paramount, though animals can't express themselves and is our responsibility to ensure their safety and wellbeing.

It is arguable that in extreme cases like a national emergency some animal testing may be a rational option

These should be solely animals not considered ‘intelligent’ by the standards of pets/domesticated animals.

Yes, but not for cosmetics and only after passing significant theoretical thresholds in all other circumstances.

This is hard to answer. Definitely not for cosmetics - with drugs, it's hard to answer unless we have another method that can avoid harm to anyone.

Yes, but not in any conditions where the animal is treated inhumanely (they must be comfortable and content)

I think with more and more modern technology I would hope this can become a thing of the past!!! Animals are beings as well

Yes, but, only animals that are not perceived as pets and it should be done humanely to prevent long term suffering of any test animal.

yes but no? dependant on what animals they are as some are very different to humans and some are very similar such as pigs. cosmetics absolutely not

As an animal advocator I firmly believe they shouldn’t be tested on but as someone who’s brother had a condition that is now treatable with an injection I say only for medicines and drugs

It's not exactly ethical and should only be an option if all other ethical options have been used up.

Animal testing should be used for medicinal properties where testing on humans may be unsafe as toxicity and efficacy are unknown, however cosmetics should aim to use alternatives or produce cleaner products to test on humans.

These should be tested on convicts and prison inmates, with the exception of when requiring a need of urgency,

Yes but only under highest welfare conditions and not for cosmetics or non-essential drugs which still must have been tested on humans first.

Yes, but there should be strict rules regarding the kind of testing, types of animals, and assurance of avoiding unnecessary cruelty

I believe yes, but only in regards to drugs, vaccines and only cosmetic procedures that save people lives or for reconstructive surgery. (Trans people, people who how been hurt changing their appearance, or have other conditions that affect someone’s appearance)

Yes but not for cosmetics and only when necessary in case of drugs, and ensuring good animal welfare standards.

Human trials mean humans get paid. Animals cannot consent and therefore cannot make a decision as to whether the burden of side effects are worth the reward. As there isn't a reward. However, if there is meaningful research and minimal and mitigated threshold of pain then it should be allowed. Mild discomfort versus extreme agony is something a human can ethically decide rather than subject an animal to.

Unfortunately I do think this has to be done for vaccines/medical research however not for cosmetics

Yes, but also encourage the development of non-aninal testing methodologies, and with a view to eventually fully transition away from using animals.

Yes, but not for cosmetics, and only for drugs/vaccines/medical devices that can help life-threatening conditions.

No and I personally think we should utilise criminals. Not those for petty crime but those who serve life sentences. They are a lot less innocent than the animals we test on

Not for cosmetics. And for medical advances only where there are no suitable non animal tests available, and after all other available testing has been completed.

Only for medical reasons and there should be a strict code for how the animals are treated (they should get to live in comfort and have good lives before and after testing)

No! Convicted criminals should be given the option / encouraged to pay back by allowing drugs trials on themselves instead!

depends on the animal, e.g. a fly is fine, no testing on dogs at all. And should only be when fully necessary (i.e. no technology allowing the testing etc).

Not for cosmetics. Use now significantly reduced for medical research but apply more pressure to use non-animal models

only when absolutely necessary for the development of new life-saving treatments, not cosmetics or medical devices

No, instead we should be allowed to test on humans if they have signed up to it, wish to die or have committed the worst possible crimes with undeniable evidence

Only in situations where there is no other option. But they definitely shouldn't be tested on for cosmetic purposes

It’s difficult to see how else safety can be established. Unnecessary suffering should be avoided when possible.

Yes, as long as the product has been fully tested and it is the last option before testing on humans

Less animals should be used and same medical tests not being repeated by different companies. More monitoring and humaine testing. Enough tests have been done over the years for cosmetics.

Not ever for cosmetics. Only for Medicine development where other testing methods eg cell lines are not viable and only through regulated application.

Vivisection should be outlawed. Less invasive experimentation eg drug trials should be used on animals before humans for medical reasons but not for cosmetics.

All drugs and medical vaccines should be lab tested using convicted criminals, specifically the ones on either death row or serving a life sentence.

As long as the product being tested on said animal will not create any severely harmful side effects

On mice and rats only on the understanding that the replicability to understand the effects on humans

Yes, but not for cosmetics and with strict regulations to ensure there's no mistreatment of the animals. Animals should be cared for to a high standard and should receive treatment for any pain or suffering.

I think there should not be testing for cosmetics. For medical research there needs to be strict criteria and offsetting contributions to animal welfare organisations

no its absolutely disgusting, we are animals too but other animals don't do drug practice and lock us in a cage and torture us our whole lives, why are we an exception?. poor animals can think, feel, see, hear and touch just like us so leave them to do there own thing like we do ours. {also respect farmers they provide all meat and veggies that we eat}

Only for drugs/vaccines/medical devices after thorough testing prior to ensure animal rights are considered.

Yes, but not for cosmetics, and companies doing animal testing should be required to fund research into alternatives

Def not for cosmetics but even for medical we should try to find the way that causes the least amount of pain to the animals in question

I don’t think any animal should suffer pain whether it’s for medical purposes or cosmetics. In my opinion to effectively torture any sentient being is totally unacceptable

Yes but not for make up. And there should be regulations on animal welfare for testing that limit suffering as much as possible.

Yes but not for cosmetics and not on animals which are of high value to the ecosystem nor family pets. Vaccines and medical treatments should be tested on rats or similar species. Only when a treatment is 99% safe before clinical trials should they be tested on animals with a higher genetic similarity to humans

Yes, but only for medicines (not cosmetics) when there is no alternative and animal testing should be phased out as soon as possible.

Yes, but not in any way that endangers the animal unless its for testing potential cures to deadly diseases

Yes but only until scientific developments reach a point where the effects of these products can be tested without an animal being used

Yes but not for cosmetics and with strict ethical controls that limit the practice to circumstances of absolute necessity.

Yes but not for testing cosmetics and only in circumstances where there are NO other viable options. Welfare of animals must be of paramount importance.

possibly if it is the only means to ensure a potentially very useful medicine or device is safefor widespread use. otherwise no.

Testing should be done on murderers or rapists compared to animals as what those people have done is already inhumane

To an extent. I think if there is no other alternative animals should be experimented on if the drug is deemed safe for humans before the start of human trials

Depends on the health of that animal, if it’s old/dying then they can be used for only testing essential drugs/vaccines/medical devices definitely not cosmetics

Providing that any outcome is species relevant and that the benefits could prevent undeniable catastrophe